IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v29y2007i2p201-215..html

Does Cost-Share Replicate Water Quality Trading Projects? Implications for a Possible Partnership

Author

Listed:
  • Hanna L. Breetz
  • Karen Fisher-Vanden

Abstract

Water Quality Trading (WQT) and federal conservation programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) employ incentive payments to encourage agricultural best management practices (BMPs). In many cases, WQT and EQIP are encouraging the same types of farmers to implement the same types of BMPs using similar incentive payments. A number of analysts have recommended that WQT partner with EQIP to recruit farmers, yet the literature lacks an analysis of whether EQIP could adequately substitute for WQT's project selection process. In this article, we systematically compare the project ranking procedures used by WQT and EQIP and suggest which partnership structures might be most appropriate.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanna L. Breetz & Karen Fisher-Vanden, 2007. "Does Cost-Share Replicate Water Quality Trading Projects? Implications for a Possible Partnership," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 201-215.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:29:y:2007:i:2:p:201-215.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2007.00338.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanna L. Breetz & Karen Fisher-Vanden & Hannah Jacobs & Claire Schary, 2005. "Trust and Communication: Mechanisms for Increasing Farmers’ Participation in Water Quality Trading," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    2. Guilherme S. Bastos & Erik Lichtenberg, 2001. "Priorities in Cost Sharing for Soil and Water Conservation: A Revealed Preference Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 533-547.
    3. Andrea Cattaneo, 2003. "The Pursuit of Efficiency and Its Unintended Consequences: Contract Withdrawals in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 449-469.
    4. King, Dennis M., 2005. "Crunch Time for Water Quality Trading," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(01), pages 1-5.
    5. Kurt Stephenson & Patricia Norris & Leonard Shabman, 1998. "Watershed‐Based Effluent Trading: The Nonpoint Source Challenge," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 16(4), pages 412-421, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karen Fisher-Vanden & Sheila Olmstead, 2013. "Moving Pollution Trading from Air to Water: Potential, Problems, and Prognosis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 147-172, Winter.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shortle, James, 2013. "Economics and Environmental Markets: Lessons from Water-Quality Trading," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 57-74, April.
    2. Catherine L. Kling, 2011. "Economic Incentives to Improve Water Quality in Agricultural Landscapes: Some New Variations on Old Ideas," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 297-309.
    3. Cattaneo, Andrea & Claassen, Roger & Johansson, Robert C. & Weinberg, Marca, 2005. "Flexible Conservation Measures on Working Land: What Challenges Lie Ahead?," Economic Research Report 7248, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Ricardo Smith, 2006. "Measuring the Effects of Working-Land Conservation Programs on Adoption of Soil-Erosion Reducing Practices and Permanent Vegetative Cover," Working Papers DTE 369, CIDE, División de Economía.
    5. Sheila M. Olmstead, 2010. "The Economics of Water Quality," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 44-62, Winter.
    6. Hanna L. Breetz & Karen Fisher-Vanden & Hannah Jacobs & Claire Schary, 2005. "Trust and Communication: Mechanisms for Increasing Farmers’ Participation in Water Quality Trading," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    7. Cloé Garnache & Scott M. Swinton & Joseph A. Herriges & Frank Lupi & R. Jan Stevenson, 2016. "Solving the Phosphorus Pollution Puzzle: Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1334-1359.
    8. McDonald, Hugh & Kerr, Suzi, 2011. "Trading Efficiency in Water Quality Trading Markets: An Assessment of Trade-Offs," Motu Working Papers 291426, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    9. Ricardo Smith Ramírez, 2007. "Testing for information asymmetries in voluntary conservation contracts," Working Papers DTE 402, CIDE, División de Economía.
    10. Arthur J. Caplan & Yuya Sasaki, 2009. "Sharing the Surplus Generated from Noncooperative Cost Sharing: The Case of Nonpoint Associations and Water Quality Trading," Working Papers 2009-09, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    11. O'Hara, Jeffrey K. & Walsh, Michael J. & Marchetti, Paul K., 2012. "Establishing a Clearinghouse to Reduce Impediments to Water Quality Trading," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 42(2), pages 1-12.
    12. Emtage, Nicholas & Herbohn, John, 2012. "Assessing rural landholders diversity in the Wet Tropics region of Queensland, Australia in relation to natural resource management programs: A market segmentation approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 107-118.
    13. Duhon, Madeline & McDonald, Hugh & Suzi, Kerr, 2015. "Nitrogen Trading in Lake Taupo An Analysis and Evaluation of an Innovative Water Management Policy," Motu Working Papers 209017, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    14. Yano, Yuki & Blandford, David, "undated". "Use of Penalties and Rewards in Agri-Environmental Policy," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36873, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    16. Boyer, Christopher N. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Velandia, Margarita & English, Burton C. & Robert, Roland K. & Larson, James A. & Larkin, Sherry L. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2016. "Cotton Producer Awareness and Participation in Cost-Sharing Programs for Precision Nutrient-Management Technology," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(01), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Maria & Irham & Slamet Hartono & Lestari Rahayu Waluyati, 2022. "The effect of environmental awareness on motivation in adopting farming conservation techniques in the various agro-ecological zones: a case study in critical land of Java Island, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1878-1896, February.
    18. Call, Isabel L. & Lew, Daniel K., 2015. "Tradable permit programs: What are the lessons for the new Alaska halibut catch sharing plan?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 125-137.
    19. Greenhalgh, Suzie, 2008. "Bundled Ecosystem Markets – Are They The Future?," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6166, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Sneeringer, Stacy, 2016. "Comparing Participation in Nutrient Trading by Livestock Operations to Crop Producers in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed," Economic Research Report 249772, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:29:y:2007:i:2:p:201-215.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Oxford University Press to update the entry or send us the correct address or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.